Russell King wrote:
>
> Jeff Garzik writes:
> > > > In a lot of ways apmd discussions are moot since the world is moving to
> > > > ACPI and acpid...
> > >
> > > It is very hard to retrofit ACPI to an existing machine
> >
> > Granted :) I'm just saying that the world isn't building new machines
> > with APM in mind[1], and future kernel power management will probably be
> > along the lines of ACPI, with APM support playing catchup where
> > possible.
>
> So we shouldn't do our best to fix it for existing machines? I don't
> understand that attitude. In fact, one of Linux' strong points is supporting
> technology which isn't "the latest cutting-edge".
Fixing it, I agree 100%
Putting a lot of new development into it, to move it into callbacks or
the kernel or elsewhere, as proposed? Seems like a lot of work for
little value to me...
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | Nothing cures insomnia like the Building 1024 | realization that it's time to get up. MandrakeSoft, Inc. | -- random fortune- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:18 EST